More importantly: It highly likely that Obama is being paid (compensated) for the use of his likeness on these coins, plates, photos, etc. Why? Federal copyright and state “right to privacy” laws.

Obama is a famous person –no different from any movie or rock star — who has a legal right to control the use of his image. The only exception is “fair use” as allowed under the U.S. copyright laws. Pix and coins of Obama are NOT exempt under “fair use.”

Whoever took the pix of Obama had to get clearance and rights from Obama in order to use his image this way. And please, do not think that a photographer has an automatic and legal right to do what s/he wants with the pix s/he takes. Even wedding photographers need to get permission from the person in order to own the copyright of the pix. Why? When you pay a photographer to take your pix, it is called “a work for hire” which means s/he does NOT own the copyright to the pix. That’s why almost all wedding photographers get customers to sign the copyrights away to them.

Even if the photographer owns the copyright, s/he still does not have any legal right to violate the rights of privacy of any private citizen. In the case of Obama, he either owns the copyright to the photos being used to make the coins, plates, etc., his right to privacy, and his right to control his image.

So Obama must be receiving compensation either directly or indirectly for the use of his image in this way.

Who thinks it’s OK for Obama to give permission to use his image this way?
Dora-Doo

BTW I didn’t see any comment button at Dyre Portents : and wasn’t going to spend all day looking. Disabling NoScript as I do here is nonsense enough. Since he ( ? ) posts here you might send a note feedback is not really encouraged.

These commemorative plates might actually be worth more than the U.S. dollar real soon! Where do I sign up.

Those 9/11 plates that had recently were really classless.